F3nd0

16 ms·

1. 271.▲
   by F3nd0 4y ago

   Care to elaborate on anything you wrote?
2. 272.▲
   by F3nd0 4y ago

   Then again, you'd have to assume that people trying to follow official pronunciation are anomalies.
3. 273.▲
   by F3nd0 4y ago

   Forjeyo, or rather For-Jay-(Y)o, I believe.
4. 274.▲
   by F3nd0 4y ago

   Not exactly. The official way of substituting the circumflex is with ‘h’, not ‘x’, so it would be written as ‘forghejo’, which might actually guide English speakers to the correct pronunciation. (There are various systems to type without di
5. 275.▲
   by F3nd0 4y ago

   Are we looking at the same graphs? In the linked comparison, WebP has at best maybe 10% of an improvement over JPEG for a 500px image, and actually performs worse as the images get bigger. (The 18% you’ve likely read are in comparison to th
6. 276.▲
   by F3nd0 4y ago

   Because WebP does not offer a >25% improvement. As far as I know, it is only better than JPEG in some cases, and then seldom by that much. [1] And of course, this is only when you compress an image lossily. If you try to recompress an al
7. 277.▲
   by F3nd0 4y ago

   Open-sourcing something does not imply that¹ at all, since open-sourcing almost always equals to releasing as free software. It's the choice to talk about the source now being open, as opposed to the users now being free, that reflects
8. 278.▲
   by F3nd0 4y ago

   I assume that implies you are not proponents of software freedom? The distinction may be important for some people, if only for placing trust in your long-term vision.
9. 279.▲
   by F3nd0 4y ago

   Another reason no language is going to be perfect is that people will disagree on what constitutes perfection. For example, I have always found the flexible word order and the accusative to be a very beautiful trait of Esperanto, and would
10. 280.▲
    by F3nd0 4y ago

    Esperanto was always another language to learn. The idea was never that you people would be able to read Esperanto without learning it; that's pretty much impossible, considering the diversity between languages (even looking just at Eu
11. 281.▲
    by F3nd0 6y ago

    There’s also re:claimID¹, which should be fully distributed and work on top of GNS², but it’s still very much a work in progress. 1. https://reclaim.gnunet.org/ 2. https://gnunet.org/en/gns.html
12. 282.▲
    by F3nd0 6y ago

    > So far the best stab at the problem is Urbit, but mostly because almost nobody else is even trying. What about GNUnet? They’re trying to build pretty much what you described, from the ground up. https://gnunet.org/en&#x
13. 283.▲
    by F3nd0 7y ago

    You could try Jami. It’s fully distributed and improves over Skype and Discord by respecting its users’ freedom. Calls should work fine with it, but text messaging outside of them can be unreliable. https://jami.net/
14. 284.▲
    by F3nd0 7y ago

    We can build a GNU one! https://gnunet.org/en/
15. 285.▲
    by F3nd0 7y ago

    Yeah, probably just moved to other repositories for the time being. (E.g. I think https://git.gnunet.org/groupchat.git/ is from secushare.) The PSYC chatrooms are pretty active, and they have recently opened some issue
16. 286.▲
    by F3nd0 7y ago

    I don't think they're associated, but they seem to have a similar function. secushare has a comparison page where they compare their project to others (including RetroShare) for various use cases, so you might want to take a look
17. 287.▲
    by F3nd0 7y ago

    Have you gotten in touch with the developers? They recently redesigned their website, and are trying to make the project more approachable in general. If you have any remarks or suggestions for improvement, I'm sure they would be appre